Sunday, 27 December 2015

It does seem truly extraordinary that at the same time as questions hang over the shooting of Jermaine Baker by a police officer there are calls to relax the controls that exist on police use of firearms. Freeing up the police to shoot people more easily will not stop terrorism but make life more dangerous for everyone. It is high time a little rationality was introduced to the arming police debate and a little less of the wild rhetoric that surrounds the subject of terrorism. Real people's lives are at stake here.

Thursday, 24 December 2015

It is now
almost a year since Secured Energy Bonds (SEB) defaulted on interest payments
to bond holders and went into administration.

Some might
wonder how far things have advanced in that time. There has been much effort
from investors to get their money back with the formation of the Investors
Action Group (IAG).

More than
100 MPs have been contacted, with government ministers, the Financial Conduct
Authority (FCA) and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) all amongst those
informed about the situation.

At present
a number of investors await a decision from the FOS as to whether they can proceed
to consider the case against Independent Portfolio Managers (IPM). The initial
indications were that the FOS believe the case does come within their
jurisdiction. However, IPM have challenged this. A new FOS adjudicator is now
considering matters, prior to hopefully moving forward.

There is growing frustration amongst investors. The feeling that the
authorities, regulatory and otherwise, are kicking the issue around amongst
themselves to little effect. The hope is that there is an effort being made to
find a just resolution for investors but the ongoing delays do not foster
confidence. A little more from administrators Grant Thornton wouldn't go amiss either.

There has
been some media coverage of the SEB case, with notable articles in the
Guardian, FT and Independent but others have remained silent.

It has
been surprising that newspapers like the Telegraph, Times, Sunday Times and
Daily Mail seem so disinterested in the story. Possibly even more surprising is
the lack of interest shown by the BBC Radio 4 programme Moneybox, which despite
several approaches has done nothing to date.

The
struggle for investors is trying to get over the nature of the offence they
have been forced to endure. Even those that have covered the story do not seem
to have written the headline big enough, namely that the Australian company CBD
Energy took out £5 million plus of the money invested to buy solar panels for
schools and used it for other purposes. This is the nub of the offence that
most of the money invested in good faith was not used for the purpose that
those investing the money intended and were led to believe it would be.

Even those
writing about the case have contextualised the story in terms of it being a
risky venture that could sink at any time. The reality is that it was not a
risky venture, had CBD Energy not swiped most the money for something else
altogether. It has been an outrageous injustice, that really should be getting
a wider audience.

The IAG is
fighting not only to get the money back of investors in SEB but also to ensure
that the law and regulatory framework is changed so that such an injustice
cannot be perpetrated on another bunch of innocent people in the future.

At present
the wheels of justice seem to be moving extremely slowly but make no mistake
the IAG are going nowhere and will continue battling until this wrong is
righted and cannot be repeated.

Wednesday, 23 December 2015

Interesting to contrast the way in which the media dealt with the news that George Osborne has once again got his sums wrong on the deficit, with the relentless Tory fed line that it was the Labour government that caused the banking crisis of 2008. The latter was fed by the Tory Party and obediently delivered relentlessly in the period up to the general election. Less publicity though for the news yesterday that the deficit has risen again by £1.3 billion to £14.3 billion in ...November. This takes cumalative borrowing up to £66.9 billion for the first eight months of the financial year. This is £2 billion short of the target set for the entire year by the Office for Budget Responsibility. Or put another way the Chancellor's policies of austerity, prefaced on reducing the deficit, are way off achieving their aim.Quite a lesson in the manufacture of consent.

Monday, 21 December 2015

Wondered why the Thatcher family were able recently to sell a government red box for £242k. Whilst the box was no doubt given to the former Prime Minister, it seems a little odd that her family are able to profit to such a degree from the sale of what was state property? I know Thatcher herself flogged off a lot of the nations assets, such as via the privatisation of water, gas, electiricity and telecommunications but surely this is a bit different?

Sunday, 20 December 2015

Siobhain McDonagh speaks of bullying from the Left of the Labour Party but the Right has bullying in it's DNA - just look at the way it has tried to bully Jeremy Corbyn since he was elected.
First, there were the efforts of Tristram Hunt and Chuka Umunna who found "the resistance` against the Mr Corbyn's leadership before disloyal Mps turned their back on Mr Corbyn during the Syria vote.
Ms Mcdonagh and the Right need to decide is whether they support a leader backed by the membership. If not, maybe they should leave and join another party?
-published in Evening Standard - 18/12/2015

Tuesday, 15 December 2015

The east London
based Ilford Recorder is moving its offices out of the borough of Redbridge to
Barking.

Editor
Chris Carter assured readers that the move would not mean the Recorder “will
not have a presence in Redbridge far from it.”

He added: “The march of technology means reporters can work
remotely from almost anywhere, so, besides having a presence in Ilford, we are
actively exploring hot desking sites in other areas of the borough.”

The Recorder does a decent job of reporting what goes on in
Redbridge – it has kept up its compliment of reporters, unlike many local
newspapers.

The nature of news coverage though is changing. The
story of a veteran reporter comes to mind, when on retirement he recalled how
25 years ago the news editor would come into the newsroom at lunch time and if
there was anyone there would ask why? The implication being they should be out chasing
down stories and making contacts.

More recently in the digital age, the news editor would come
into the newsroom, if someone was missing they’d want to know where they were.
The era of internet journalism coupled with bean counter dominance over
editorial has changed the culture to one of being chained to the desk, surveying
the internet, rather than getting out to meet people and make contacts.

Another effect of technological change has been a reduction in
staff. Reporters are pushed to do more for less. Few stay on local papers very
long, as pay is poor and career prospects not much better.

The days of a journalist staying on a local paper for many years,
building a historic knowledge of the area, have long since passed. Some
would-be journalists start their careers on local papers before moving off to
better remunerated and more secure jobs on the other side of the fence, working
in PR, often for local authority press offices. A lucky few may graduate onto national papers
but this route is far less well travelled than in the past.

Despite the arrival of online journalism, local papers have
spread themselves ever thinner when it comes to personnel. Yet, arguably there is
more to do, with a daily new service to be provided online as well as the hard
print version of the paper. All this is being done with fewer journalists than previously.
Technology has ofcourse made a difference but the product has in some ways also
been devalued.

Take the Redbridge area, the Ilford Recorder’s main rival in the area are the
Newsquest run Guardian newspapers. Newsquest are a big group of papers
spreading across the area but sometimes maybe the resources are spread too thin.

The weekly paper, the Wanstead &Woodford Guardian covers the major stories but progress in only a
few pages and the paper starts to pull in material from other areas. Stories
from other papers in the group, serving adjoining areas like Epping, Chingford and Enfield make an appearance.

The person living in the Wanstead and Woodford area is left
wondering why am I reading these stories, is there so little happening here?

Who knows, is it lack of resources, lack of journalists or is
Wanstead and Woodford simply a news light area? Or are the owners of some
newspapers, guided by accountants, simply spreading the resources too thinly. In defence, no doubt there would be the argument that the papers are in transition with the emphasis moving increasingly from print to online but this only carries a certain amount of weight.The tendency identified in east London is by no means
unique – titles across the country operate in similar fashion.It is a real race to the bottom culture that is bad for journalism and local communities seeking to know what is going on in their areas.So good luck to the Ilford Recorder with its move but don’t cut
the journalistic team that reports the news from the Redbridge.. oh and let them
out at lunchtime.

Monday, 14 December 2015

This entertaining game ended goaless, despite chances aplenty for both sides.

West Ham manager Slaven Bilic was pleased with the team work and spirit of his injury ravaged side.

Minus five first team regulars, Bilic had to turn to other members of his squad to fill the gaps.

The manager had special words of praise for Michail Antonio, who made his first start. “Antonio was good, he had the pace to run behind them and he fought to win the ball back and used it well,” said Bilic, who noted the high tempo nature of the contest and how both sides defended well. “It was a fair result, a very entertaining draw. With a bit of luck we could have won this game but so could they.”

Stoke manager Mark Hughes acknowledged a fine defending performance from his side but thought they could also have won it.

In the first half, the two sides tended to cancel each other out, with some intricate interplay but a lack of clear cut chances resulting.

Stoke conjured a slick passing move between Ibrahim Afellay, Glen Johnson and Marko Arnautovic, only for the latter to squeeze his shot wide.

In the second half, West Ham stretched Stoke with the slick interchanges between Mauro Zarate and Cheikhou Kouyate as well as Anotonio getting in behind defenders.

An early Zarate cross saw Andy Carroll forcing a save from Jack Butland, then Antonio had a point blank effort pawed away.

Both sides rocked the woodwork. Arnautovic saw his deflected free kick bounce off the top of the bar. The industrious Zarate, though, was not to be outdone, working his way across the penalty area before firing in a shot that bounced off the upright.

Enner Valencia nearly nicked the points late on with a dipping free kick but again the Stoke keeper was equal to the challenge, pushing the shot over the bar.

West Ham nearly took the spoils at the death with a scramble in the Stoke area which saw defender James Tompkins hook the ball back, only for a thumping header from Kouyate to be pushed out from under the bar by that man Butland again.

Tuesday, 8 December 2015

Funny how when it comes to combatting climate change the debate is immediately dominated by cost. When it comes to war, cost hardly gets a mention, the pockets are endlessly deep.
Similarly, compare the rhetoric of the approaching apocalypse applied to the terror threat, with the restrained tones of doubt that still permeate the climate change debate.
The reality ofcourse is that the real apocalyptic threat comes from climate change.. and as the floods in Cumbria so aptly demonstrate need urgent attention now.

Tuesday, 1 December 2015

At some
point in the very near future the Labour Party leadership is going to have to
address the question of those opposed to almost everything Jeremy Corbyn stands
for. The debate over the vote on bombing Syria quickly turned into a question
of leadership. Too many in the Parliamentary Labour Party have a real problem
accepting the line set out by the leader (the argument that Jeremy himself rebelled
many times, really does have a limited shelf lifeas an excuse).

The Syria
vote nicely crystallises the situation with Jeremy apparently opening in
opposition to the bombing, whilst shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn closes
supporting the bombing. This is not a new politics, as some suggest, but a mess.

The MPs
voting for the bombing are ignoring the 70,000 members plus who indicated over
the weekend that they opposed such a move. There do seem to be a number of
serial bombers in the Parliamentary Labour Party ranks, with a number of MPs
set to support the Syria bombing, who also voted in favour of the war in Iraq
in 2003.

At some
point, the MPs who oppose Jeremy’s leadership have to make up their mind
whether to knuckle under and support or leave. Things cannot go on as
they are now, with part of the PLP operating as an internal opposition to the
leader – no doubt in the hope that he will be overthrown and replaced by one of
their number. This is simply not going to happen – Jeremy Corbyn won a strong
mandate from the membership, which remains fully behind him – as the 70,000 who
showed support over his stance on Syria proved. If a coup were executed, there
would be such revulsion in the party as a whole inside and outside Parliament
that it is doubtful that the new leader would have a party left to lead.

It is
time for those in the PLP to either support Jeremy Corbyn wholeheartedly or
consider their own positions. If they want to join another party then go ahead,
a by-election would ofcourse have to be called in their seats in such a
circumstance. What is for sure is that the simmering civil war cannot continue.

Saturday, 28 November 2015

The
attack on civil liberties, evident in the Trade Union Bill (TUB), needs to be
viewed in the wider context of an increasingly authoritarian government
determined to outlaw any form of dissent.

The
anti-libertarian elements seen in the TUB also find resonance in the
Investigatory Powers Bill and the efforts to scrap the Human Rights Act and
replace it with a watered down Bill of Rights. The measures taken together
amount to an attempt to advance the powers of the authoritarian state at the
cost of the rights of the citizen.

Liberty,
Amnesty International, the TUC and Conservative MP David Davis are amongst
those who have condemned the negative impact that the Trade Union Bill will
have on civil rights if it is made law.

The
thrust of the TUB is a direct attack on the right of trade unions to exist and
operate effectively in the workplace and beyond. The right to strike is being
made more difficult, with the new thresholds of a minimum 50% turnout and at
least 40% of those eligible needing to vote in favour.

Then
there are the efforts to restrict assembly by insisting that a picket
supervisor must be appointed with a letter of authorisation to that effect.
Details of the supervisor have to be provided to the police. The supervisor
also has to wear an armband or badge identifying themselves. Unions are to be
required to give two weeks notice of industrial action rather than the present
seven days.

Conservative
MP Davis questioned the need for pickets to give their names to the police
force. “What is this? This isn’t Franco’s Britain, this is Queen Elizabeth II’s
Britain,” said Davis.

Liberty,
Amnesty International and the British Institute for Human Rights have described
the TUB as “a major attack” on civil liberties.
“By placing more legal hurdles in the way of unions organising strike action,
the TUB will undermine ordinary people’s ability to organise together to
protect their jobs, livelihoods and the quality of their working lives,” said a
statement by the three organisations. “It will introduce harsher restrictions
on those who picket peacefully outside workplaces - even though pickets are
already more regulated than any other kind of protest.

“It is
hard to see the aim of this bill as anything but seeking to undermine the
rights of all working people.”

The
thread of denying the most basic civil rights is taken forward in the
Investigatory Powers Bill or as it is more commonly known the “Snoopers
Charter.” The Bill seeks to make phone companies keep records of websites
visited by every citizen for 12 months so that they can be accessed by police,
security services and other public bodies.

The Bill
makes explicit in law the power of the police to hack into and bug computers
and phones. The phone companies will also be required to assist with the
operations to bypass encryption.

Judges
are to be given a role but this is not to authorise or dismiss interception
requests but instead to oversee whether politicians are exercising that power
correctly.

“We expect the State to obtain a warrant before entering our homes, never
mind searching them and taking away our belongings. Why should it be any
different when it comes to our communications?” said a Liberty spokesperson.

The
authoritarian intent of the government has been clear since it won office last
May, declaring it wanted to do away with the Human Rights Act. This head of
steam to take away human rights was engendered by some selective reporting of
particular cases brought under the Act by the right wing media and tapping into
a xenophobic anti-Europeanism.

The
Conservative Government wanted to pull out of the HRA, which simply enshrines
the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law. The ECHR has nothing
to do with the European Union and is something that Britain has been signed up
to since its creation post World War II. Ironically, Britain played a major
role in the creation of the ECHR in the first place. The HRA merely gave the
full power of the ECHR at first instance through the British domestic courts.
Prior to incorporation of the ECHR individuals had to appeal their cases to the
European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

In the
first instance, the government realised that it was not going to be able to get
repeal of the HRA through the House of Lords. However, Justice minister Michael
Gove now appears to have revived the idea, with a consultation underway on a
Bill of Rights.

These
three developments are symptomatic of an overall effort to clamp down on
dissent. Over recent years, there have been ongoing efforts to make public
protest more difficult. Most recently this saw the Metropolitan Police seeking
to make protest organisers pay for the policing of their own events.

There has
been a steady drip drip approach to taking away human rights over recent years,
on the basis of the need to provide security. Former Chief Constable of Devon
and Cornwall John Alderson has warned that this has been the claim of dictators
down the years. He was not wrong.

One
dictator who knew the value of this mantra was Adolf Hitler, who said: “The
best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a
little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousands, tiny and
almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those
rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes
cannot be reversed.”

Some
would argue that it is this erosion of rights process that is now underway,
with the most visible evidence coming
with the moves to implement the Trade Union Bill and Investigatory Powers Bill
and repeal the Human Rights Act. Human
rights organisations certainly seem in little doubt.

“Cracking
down on civic space is a global phenomenon that is deeply worrying to Amnesty,
and it’s very concerning that it’s happening in the UK too. Recently, we’ve
seen the UK government pursue a shameless policy of prioritising business
interests over human rights concerns,” said James Savage, director of Amnesty’s
Human Rights Defenders Programme. “As the British
government rolls out the red carpet for autocratic leaders, it is rolling back
the rights agenda here in the UK, through its threat to replace the Human
Rights Act with a weaker British Bill of Rights, placing growing restrictions
on rights of assembly and association with the Trade Union Bill, and ever-more-invasive
infringements on the right to privacy via expanded surveillance powers and
practice."

Liberty claim that “just six months in the government is showing an
arrogant disregard for our rights and freedoms.”

While the Investigatory Powers Bill will undermine the security and
freedom of everyone who uses a computer or phone. Combine with this vindictive
Trade Union Bill, attempts to curb the Freedom of Information Act and the
proposed scrapping of our Human Rights Act and it seems the Government is
intent on dismantling the most effective tools ordinary people have to protect
themselves against the whims of the powerful,” said Bella Sankey, director of
policy at Liberty.

What is
for sure is that human rights are under attack across the board, failure to
stand up and fight for these hard won protections will severely damage everyone
in the long run.